lectures14+15-第16部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


a　definition　of　〃the　ideal　horse；〃　so　long　as　dragging　drays　and



running　races；　bearing　children；　and　jogging　about　with



tradesmen's　packages　all　remain　as　indispensable　differentiations



of　equine　function。　　You　may　take　what　you　call　a　general



all…round　animal　as　a　compromise；　but　he　will　be　inferior　to　any



horse　of　a　more　specialized　type；　in　some　one　particular



direction。　We　must　not　forget　this　now　when；　in　discussing



saintliness；　we　ask　if　it　be　an　ideal　type　of　manhood。　　We　must



test　it　by　its　economical　relations。







I　think　that　the　method　which　Mr。　Spencer　uses　in　his　Data　of



Ethics　will　help　to　fix　our　opinion。　　Ideality　in　conduct　is



altogether　a　matter　of　adaptation。　　A　society　where　all　were



invariably　aggressive　would　destroy　itself　by　inner　friction；　and



in　a　society　where　some　are　aggressive；　others　must　be



non…resistant；　if　there　is　to　be　any　kind　of　order。　This　is　the



present　constitution　of　society；　and　to　the　mixture　we　owe　many



of　our　blessings。　　But　the　aggressive　members　of　society　are



always　tending　to　become　bullies；　robbers；　and　swindlers；　and　no



one　believes　that　such　a　state　of　things　as　we　now　live　in　is　the



millennium。　　It　is　meanwhile　quite　possible　to　conceive　an



imaginary　society　in　which　there　should　be　no　aggressiveness；　but



only　sympathy　and　fairnessany　small　community　of　true　friends



now　realizes　such　a　society。　　Abstractly　considered；　such　a



society　on　a　large　scale　would　be　the　millennium；　for　every　good



thing　might　be　realized　there　with　no　expense　of　friction。　　To



such　a　millennial　society　the　saint　would　be　entirely　adapted。　



His　peaceful　modes　of　appeal　would　be　efficacious　over　his



companions；　and　there　would　be　no　one　extant　to　take　advantage　of



his　non…resistance。　　The　saint　is　therefore　abstractly　a　higher



type　of　man　than　the　〃strong　man；〃　because　he　is　adapted　to　the



highest　society　conceivable；　whether　that　society　ever　be



concretely　possible　or　not。　　The　strong　man　would　immediately



tend　by　his　presence　to　make　that　society　deteriorate。　　It　would



become　inferior　in　everything　save　in　a　certain　kind　of　bellicose



excitement；　dear　to　men　as　they　now　are。







But　if　we　turn　from　the　abstract　question　to　the　actual



situation；　we　find　that　the　individual　saint　may　be　well　or　ill



adapted；　according　to　particular　circumstances。　　There　is；　in



short；　no　absoluteness　in　the　excellence　of　sainthood。　　It　must



be　confessed　that　as　far　as　this　world　goes；　anyone　who　makes　an



out…and…out　saint　of　himself　does　so　at　his　peril。　　If　he　is　not



a　large　enough　man；　he　may　appear　more　insignificant　and



contemptible；　for　all　his　saintship；　than　if　he　had　remained　a



worldling。＇223＇　　Accordingly　religion　has　seldom　been　so



radically　taken　in　our　Western　world　that　the　devotee　could　not



mix　it　with　some　worldly　temper。　It　has　always　found　good　men　who



could　follow　most　of　its　impulses；　but　who　stopped　short　when　it



came　to　non…resistance。　　Christ　himself　was　fierce　upon　occasion。　



Cromwells；　Stonewall　Jacksons；　Gordons；　show　that　Christians　can



be　strong　men　also。







＇223＇　We　all　know　DAFT　saints；　and　they　inspire　a　queer　kind　of



aversion。　But　in　comparing　saints　with　strong　men　we　must　choose



individuals　on　the　same　intellectual　level。　　The　under…witted



strong　man　homologous　in　his　sphere　with　the　under…witted　saint；



is　the　bully　of　the　slums；　the　hooligan　or　rowdy。　　Surely　on　this



level　also　the　saint　preserves　a　certain　superiority。















How　is　success　to　be　absolutely　measured　when　there　are　so　many



environments　and　so　many　ways　of　looking　at　the　adaptation？　　It



cannot　be　measured　absolutely；　the　verdict　will　vary　according　to



the　point　of　view　adopted。　　From　the　biological　point　of　view



Saint　Paul　was　a　failure；　because　he　was　beheaded。　　Yet　he　was



magnificently　adapted　to　the　larger　environment　of　history；　and



so　far　as　any　saint's　example　is　a　leaven　of　righteousness　in　the



world；　and　draws　it　in　the　direction　of　more　prevalent　habits　of



saintliness；　he　is　a　success；　no　matter　what　his　immediate　bad



fortune　may　be。　　The　greatest　saints；　the　spiritual　heroes　whom



every　one　acknowledges；　the　Francises；　Bernards；　Luthers；



Loyolas；　Wesleys；　Channings；　Moodys；　Gratrys；　the　Phillips



Brookses；　the　Agnes　Joneses；　Margaret　Hallahans；　and　Dora



Pattisons；　are　successes　from　the　outset。　　They　show　themselves；



and　there　is　no　question；　every　one　perceives　their　strength　and



stature。　　Their　sense　of　mystery　in　things；　their　passion；　their



goodness；　irradiate　about　them　and　enlarge　their　outlines　while



they　soften　them。　　They　are　like　pictures　with　an　atmosphere　and



background；　and；　placed　alongside　of　them；　the　strong　men　of　this



world　and　no　other　seem　as　dry　as　sticks；　as　hard　and　crude　as



blocks　of　stone　or　brick…bats。







In　a　general　way；　then；　and　〃on　the　whole；〃＇224＇　our　abandonment



of　theological　criteria；　and　our　testing　of　religion　by　practical



common　sense　and　the　empirical　method；　leave　it　in　possession　of



its　towering　place　in　history。　　Economically；　the　saintly　group



of　qualities　is　indispensable　to　the　world's　welfare。　　The　great



saints　are　immediate　successes；　the　smaller　ones　are　at　least



heralds　and　harbingers；　and　they　may　be　leavens　also；　of　a　better



mundane　order。　　Let　us　be　saints；　then；　if　we　can；　whether　or　not



we　succeed　visibly　and　temporally。　　But　in　our　Father's　house　are



many　mansions；　and　each　of　us　must　discover　for　himself　the　kind



of　religion　and　the　amount　of　saintship　which　best　comports　with



what　he　believes　to　be　his　powers　and　feels　to　be　his　truest



mission　and　vocation。　　There　are　no　successes　to　be　guaranteed



and　no　set　orders　to　be　given　to　individuals；　so　long　as　we



follow　the　methods　of　empirical　philosophy。







＇224＇　See　above；　p。　321。















This　is　my　conclusion　so　far。　　I　know　that　on　some　of　your　minds



it　leaves　a　feeling　of　wonder　that　such　a　method　should　have　been



applied　to　such　a　subject；　and　this　in　spite　of　all　those　remarks



about　empiricism　which　I　made　at　the　beginning　of　Lecture



XIII。＇225＇　How；　you　say；　can　religion；　which　believes　in　two



worlds　and　an　invisible　order；　be　estimated　by　the　adaptation　of



its　fruits　to　this　world's　order　alone？　　It　is　its　truth；　not　its



utility；　you　insist；　upon　which　our　verdict　ought　to　depend。　　If



religion　is　true；　its　fruits　are　good　fruits；　even　though　in　this



world　they　should　prove　uniformly　ill　adapted　and　full　of　naught



but　pathos。　　It　goes　back；　then；　after　all；　to　the　question　of



the　truth　of　theology。　The　plot　inevitably　thickens　upon　us；　we